Self interest also works to the Communities advantage. As long as it is not to the detriment of the Community, then who cares. Its PPP, not PVP.
Im not promoting free reign and complete degen behaviour. But structure activities that will put Community first, and if someone else benefits some other way (directly or indriectly) its ok.
Only caveat no front running. (If its even possible to really prove)
Hello,
I spent some time reading up on past proposals and discussions around it and would like to ask 1 question, What is the 1 Objective/Mission/Goal (everyone can debate the terms, but we all get the jist) is this Council suppose to achieve?
Besides that, i think we have more than enough to go on to make a decision. This is a 8 month discussion that needs to close, be voted on, and executed. Or we will have proven our inability to chose a direction and therefore, we have failed the DAO.
I know we will succeed,
LFG!
A.mensch
Very well said, ser!
Though this is the main criteria when you are putting community interest first and when you are putting other projects you are part of (as team member/creator/moderator and so on) interest first - itās very thin fringe here to observe!
In another words for me, as I see it from my perspective, you donāt work for BMW when you are employed by Mercedes, if you got the idea right!
Having the same old school business principles applied, for me itās important to see the background of the nominees and how their current position can interfere with Pyth DAO interestsā¦
I dont think need to dox, and put spyware on the computers of our Representatives. Honestly, I dont see how someone can act in the Committee Role and be detremental to the Community?
@N0name_trader i love your analogy about the car manufacturers. Id say we are more like the steel manufactures. We provide steal to both Mercedes and BMW, so we want both of them to sell more cars, because then we will sell more steel.
With proper security measures of community funds (if they ever have access to it), i dont see where is the danger?
You my fren, are 100% correct, in real life we must be more vigilent. But we are not in that world, we are Web 3, the better version of what we are use to seeing.
Besides working for the direct competitiors, i think we can keep the restrictions list short.
My biggest concern is that we will wait another few months to discuss, and without a clearly defined deadline, we are lost
With proper security measures of community funds (if they ever have access to it), i donāt see where is the danger?
I am not telling about breaching any security of community funds here. My concern was about totally other matter. People are interested in promoting their project, their team or whatever is there. Thatās why I would vote for loyalist and for me having Pyth background would be much more appreciated that candidates that are currently having paid / owner positions in other communities.
Of course we can always bring to the attention that people has certain experience in this matter and can be valuable. This problem will be easily solved by Council Lead who will have certainly a big degree of expertise as well as certain knowledge to assist running the council.
I dont see how someone can act in the Committee Role and be detremental to the Community?
I can give you an example. I am the owner of the project. I am nominated to the council. My funds as well as my income are depending on the project I am running. Can I attract more attention to my project with the help of Pyth DAO brand, as well as clearly my main zone of interest will be focused on my project and in the 1st place I am thinking about it. Clash of interest that will interfere with the duties for both parties.
I am highly convinced that this is highly potential scenario that can happen. Same as in real world.
So I am not telling about the corporate espionage here. I am talking about being a true loyalist and being active community Pyth member rather than privileged person with some projects associations.
I would always choose true believer, who stays in one place. And I proved my logic above why in my head these are all potential scenarios.
Thatās why I am looking for list of criterias for the Council member rather that just stake Pyth and be Pythian.
Just pointing out my opinion in all of this. And respect your side as well, as I know how much you believe in the project. So we are more allies than you even think.
I didnt ever question out alignment in these matters.
I was just thinking, if a āLoyaltistā to Pyth and to Project A were electected to the Committee, that network and connectikn should prove invaluable because of the perspective more than the connection that could be made.
For example, in our server we have probably 3-10 KOLs as per X Followers. They might be more experienced than me to get community attention and engagement. I do not want to disallow them from being involved just because of their success. I want the Committee to leverage their experience and success to make us successful as well.
I agree with you @N0name_trader . We should have criteria tonfilter out ubsclavior actors, but also be mindful not cut out good candidates as well.
Maybe, skip the crrieria, let people nominate themselves or others, then we hear their ideas, DYOR and vote asap?
This is a fantastic idea.
More than likely this becomes something that the Council (likely with someone like Bats) builds on Dune or something similar.
Excellent fantastic though, Solar!
The Code of Conduct has mandatory reporting of council activities.
There are 2 reports during the term
I love the suggestion of having some kind of monthly meeting or catchup of council members, though. Perhaps that is something we can do as a weekly or monthly public event in the Discord (and on Twitter) as a part of our Community events.
Iāve enjoyed reading the discussion between you and @Amensch regarding āconflict of interestā, and I have to say I agree with both of you. Allow me to share how I see both sides of the issue, and how I believe the solution is already there.
I agree with @Amensch that we should not be overly restrictive regarding who we perceive as suitable candidates. Similar to the other two councils, we want individuals who can bring the most value to Pyth. Such individuals are often well-connected and likely to be involved in other projects in various capacities. As long as they are true believers in Pyth, I donāt think they should be excluded from our consideration. After all, strategic collaborations and partnerships (at the community level) seem to be one of the core functions of this council, and these individuals often have the necessary skillsets and connections to execute these functions well. As long as such initiatives/collaborations bring value to Pyth, such win-win situations are fine.
On the other hand, I understand the concerns highlighted by @N0name_trader. If a council member has a vested interest in another project, it becomes harder to discern their priorities and motivations. So for example, when proposing a possible partnership/collaboration, a council member may be tempted to āoversellā the benefits to Pyth, in order to secure a āgreater benefitā for that other project they represent, resulting in an inequitable or unbalanced arrangement. We want to avoid this, and I believe with certain mechanisms, this can be minimized and mitigated.
First, in the Code of Conduct H2, Para 2:
āEach Council Member shall promptly disclose in writing any actual, potential, or perceived Conflict of Interest to the Council, providing a detailed account of the facts and circumstances that raise the suspicion of such Conflict of Interest. Upon disclosure, the Council shall, by a simple majority vote of its remaining Council Members (excluding the disclosing Council Member), determine whether a Conflict of Interest exists.ā
As long as council members are held to this standard, it serves as a first layer of mitigation. The councilās plurality also prevents a single member from can acting against the best interests of Pyth. BUT this will only be achieved if we elect the right people - members who are able to think independently, critically and objectively, and genuinely seek the best interests of Pyth.
To make the system even more robust and decentralized, I would also suggest an additional consideration/restriction to the composition of the council, which could be something like this:
Out of the 7 council members, not more than two can hold key positions in the same external project, at any one time. (āKey positionsā could be defined as paid positions or any other way we want to define it.)
(cc: @Chop for my suggestion at the end)
Great to hear sir!
Yeah think by using dune should be more than enough for these metrics.
Btw I created this account for about 1 week and I did everything so far to reach level 2 in order to being able to make posts, although Im still not able to post idk whatās missing.
The post is about revenue and future buybacks.
Soooo. We have proposals, we have discussions, we have social media exposure lets have a vote?
Oh wait, we havent gotten through to the most important part. We dont have Candidates to be on the Council. I dont believe we will ever find people to volunteer their time and energy freely.
Lets get this final piece out in the open and see who we are going to proceed with;
@arguer @N0name_trader @Chop @SOLAR and everyone else thats been involved so far; are we ok with $200,000/yr, split between all elected Council Members, paid weekly, at the rate of Pyth/Dollar at the time of distribution?
Can we discuss this for another day or two, and then put it all to a vote? Because lots of great people are out there acting on great opportunities, instead of committing to this great opportunity.
I agree on the payment. I also agree that we definitely need to start nominating people soon - since the vote will happen on-chain I assume it will take apx 2 weeks to form the Council after the discussion is over.
I agree 100% that we should proceed with the nominations!
Discussion is always great. but we need to embody something to life!
I nominate @N0name_trader @Planck @bats4 @Derrp to the Community Council.
@Chop Id nominate you too, but I think youre busy enough
if team members are eligible, @Chop for council lead.
no one is a better fit for that role, in my honest opinion.
Happy to read all the discussions around the Conflict of Interest. I assume that all candidates will act in benefit of the community with the community funds but its important to have these discussions before hand.
The Code of Conduct is a very good base to set the minimums in terms of reporting and I agree with @Chop that a discussion/call on the Discord/X through Community Events is a very interesting idea.
I think that the past months showed that it was possible to build and deliver interesting initiatives and collabs while managing any potential conflict.
I have been thinking and rethinking this idea for the past months starting with the v1 of this proposal and I guess its our call for action.
I think it may also be a useful strategy to help guide the council in the beginning stages at the very least.
Whilst this decentalisation of the community initiatives is a great thing, I think itās also important to do these things in a controlled manner. So the transition is smooth, effective, and successful.
Iām with you on this one, we canāt be overly suspicious to the point of not letting potential quality people not participate purely because they are involved with other projects within the space.
I think if people are acting in self/conflict of interest it would become evident quite quickly and their position would then be under review and payments suspended. The potential of that alone I would imagine would be enough of a deterrent for most.
From what I see in and around the space it is not uncommon for people to be involved with multiple projects in a paid or ākeyā role in some way shape or form. I see this as a positive if anything as it shows they have experience and potential access to more connections throughout the ecos.
I personally say pick people on merit and then let their actions decide the outcome.
As for votes/nominations from what @Chop has said earlier, everyone interested in participating should be self nominating for the two roles they would be interested in doing.
If everyone who is interested could put themselves forward and we can see how many people/roles we have covered we could start pushing things along a bit Iād imagine.
I guess everybody should agree here that we should move to candidates proposal stage!
I totally agree with @Amensch that we can stuck on this discussion here for a long timeā¦
I can state only 1 thing = Constitution can be amended by Council Members later with same voting system.
Some time will pass for sure to polish the final version with all necessary remarks that will arise later on, imo.